Bay Area Skepticshttp://baskeptics.org
enDON'T PANIC with the SciSchmooze 2.12.18http://baskeptics.org/node/376
<p>Happy Week of Science!</p>
<p>Sometimes I just get so excited about what science does for us. It helps us harness the resources of the world so that we may live better lives. (Sadly not all get to benefit from this and some actually use this against us, or try to get more than their share.) It inspires us to keep learning and figuring out more about this amazing planet and solar system. It helps us figure out how life works and helps us heal and live more fruitful lives. </p>
<p>Sometimes though it just makes many of us yell and cheer. We might jump up and down in the office. We might stand in awe at something that hasn't been done before, or in a long time. It might even make us laugh at the crazy beauty of it all. I had one of those experiences last week and I'd bet many of you did to. How can you not do all of the above when someone puts his shiny red car...</p>
<p>on top of <a href="https://youtu.be/wbSwFU6tY1c?t=1211" target="_blank">three rockets bolted together</a> and launches it into space with a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3niFzo5VLI" target="_blank">manikin in the driver's seat</a>, and the display on the dash simply says "DON'T PANIC". After this he choreographs a <a href="https://youtu.be/l5I8jaMsHYk" target="_blank">beautiful "dance"</a> of two of the rockets landing together at almost the same instant just a few hundred yards from each other! Just to acknowledge this, <a href="https://youtu.be/VrPr0sVBMWI" target="_blank">not everything went perfectly</a>. </p>
<p>Remember, it wasn't just <a href="https://youtu.be/nSCG-Ga4D-s" target="_blank">Elon</a>. There is very little science a single person can do anymore. From microscopic lab experiments to big science it takes a <a href="https://youtu.be/6XtD-5L7cLk" target="_blank">lot of people</a>. When you see a scientist speak and there are kids around. Ask how many people it took to do what he or she is saying she or he did! <a href="https://gaiacantelli.scienceblog.com/how-to-be-a-scientist/" target="_blank">How To Be A Scientist</a> </p>
<p>Here's another item that is great news for us here in the SF Bay Area. Even greater, for the folks that live in or near San Francisco. Many if of you may not know about the Grand Reopening of the <a href="https://www.randallmuseum.org/" target="_blank" target="_blank">Randall Museum of Science, Nature and the Arts</a>. They <a href="https://www.randallmuseum.org/about-us/facilities/randall-museum-reopened/" target="_blank">reopened today</a>. As you probably know I am a, shall we say passionate, fan of the <a href="https://www.exploratorium.edu/" target="_blank">explOratorium, a museum of science, art and human perception</a> and also a fan of the <a href="https://www.calacademy.org/" target="_blank">California Academy of Sciences</a>. Aside from a major remodel that has just been finished, the Randall has another major thing going for it that neither the Academy or the explO have. At the Randall Museum ADMISSION IS FREE! </p>
<p>I'll bet there is some presentation going on in the area that you would love to attend and learn something new at. Here are a few that I think warrant your consideration…</p>
<ol>
<li value="NaN"><a href="http://www.bayareascience.org/calendar/index.php?eID=22087" target="_blank">The Universe Continues to Reveal Surprises</a> Tue 7:30 Stanford</li>
<li value="NaN"><a href="http://www.bayareascience.org/calendar/index.php?eID=22056" target="_blank">The Fountain of Youth?</a> Fri 6:00 San Francisco</li>
<li value="NaN"><a href="http://www.bayareascience.org/calendar/index.php?eID=22117" target="_blank"> Carbon in California’s Abyss</a> Sun 1:30 Santa Cruz (at another underappreciated place of learning!).</li>
<li value="NaN">More of a bonus # 3.5 … <a href="http://www.bayareascience.org/calendar/index.php?eID=22111" target="_blank">Wonderfest: The Secret Life of Viruses</a> Sat 2:00 Alameda </li>
</ol>
<p>There are so many items coming across my monitor these days it is impossible to keep up. Here's two examples <a href="https://futurism.com/science-weekly/" target="_blank">of items</a> from <a href="https://www.livescience.com/50718-weekend-reading.html" target="_blank">just the past week</a>. This also creates the need for some critical thinking to figure out what's worth reading. What might interest someone else but still represent good science, instead of some of the junk that's out there masquerading as science. Some stuff is just a great melding of science and art as well. Here are a few items that I think are worth some time…</p>
<p><a href="https://www.parent.com/how-to-help-your-kids-build-a-better-bs-detector/" target="_blank">How to Help Your Kids Build a Better BS Detector</a></p>
<p><a href="https://gaiacantelli.scienceblog.com/259/the-science-you-should-have-heard-of-this-week-lets-talk-about-asparagine/" target="_blank">Let’s Talk About Asparagine</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.livescience.com/61661-woodpeckers-brain-damage.html" target="_blank">Got a headache?</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQm3ZjZRpdo" target="_blank">Penn &amp; Teller: The Magic of Skepticism</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.vox.com/videos/2017/9/29/16378594/blue-planet-hans-zimmer-radiohead" target="_blank">How Hans Zimmer and Radiohead transformed "Bloom" for Blue Planet II</a></p>
<p>A note for next month: The Bay Area Skeptics will be holding their Skeptalk at a new venue in San Francisco. So if you have always wondered what being a skeptic is about but couldn't make it to Berkeley or Millbrae, you can join in for a pint of Ireland and learn a bit about <a href="http://www.bayareascience.org/calendar/index.php?eID=22253" target="_blank">Quantum Quackery</a>. </p>
<p>There are a lot of great places in the SF Bay Area to learn science. It would be great if you shared with us some of your favorite places. If you will include the name and link to it we'll figure a way to share them with everyone else. There are so many just in the area that it will make a great challenge to go to all of them. If you just want to let us know what you think about the SciSchmooze we'd like to hear that as well. For instance, do you read the "blurb", or just look at the calendar listings. Either way you should always check the presenters' website for last minute changes that we can't keep up with. Let us know when this happens especially if it is before the presentation has happened.<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<p>Have a great week learning something new and celebrating science. </p>
<p><em>herbert a. masters III</em><br />
<em>ScienceSchmoozer and a</em> shameless promoter of:<br />
<em>the SciSchmooze @ </em><a href="http://www.BayAreaScience.org" target="_blank">www.BayAreaScience.org</a><br />
&nbsp;</p>
<p><span><strong><em><span class="mc-toc-title">"Train yourselves. Don't wait to be fed knowledge out of a book. Get out and seek it. Make explorations. Do your own research work. Train your hands and your mind. Become curious. Invent your own problems and solve them. You can see things going on all about you. Inquire into them. Seek out answers to your own questions. There are many phenomena going on in nature the explanation of which cannot be found in books. Find out why these phenomena take place. Information a boy gets by himself is enormously more valuable than that which is taught to him in school."<br />
</span></em></strong></span> - <strong><a href="https://todayinsci.com/L/Langmuir_Irving/LangmuirIrving-Quotations.htm" target="_blank">Irving Langmuir</a></strong>, American physical chemist (born 31 Jan 1881).<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<p> <strong>Upcoming Events</strong>:<br />
Click to see the <a href="http://www.bayareascience.org/calendar/index.php?com=searchresult&amp;e=1519707600&amp;k=&amp;t=" target="_blank" target="_blank">next two weeks of events</a> in your browser.</p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/376#commentsMon, 12 Feb 2018 19:32:27 +0000Herb Masters376 at http://baskeptics.orgThe Human Drive to Explainhttp://baskeptics.org/node/512
<p>(a SkepTalk by Tania<span class="inline inline-right"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/Lombrozo.thumbnail.jpg" alt="Tania Lombrozo, Phd" title="Tania Lombrozo, Phd" class="image image-thumbnail " width="106" height="150" /><span class="caption"><strong>Tania Lombrozo, Phd</strong></span></span> Lombrozo, PhD, presented 8 February)</p>
<p>Stephen J. Gould described humans as “the primates who tell stories.” Psychologist Robyn Dawes took it one step further, arguing that we’re “the primates whose cognitive capacity shuts down in the absence of a story.” At BAS’s February SkepTalk, Dr. Tania Lombrozo, Professor of Psychology at UC Berkeley, asked: Why are we so...</p>
<p>motivated to find a good story or explanation? Is this tendency beneficial? And Dr. Lombrozo answered with insights that showed how our “drive to explain” itself explains some of the most remarkable human achievements, but also some of our failings.</p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/512#commentsSun, 11 Feb 2018 23:19:58 +0000Tucker Hiatt512 at http://baskeptics.orgNeed a little help from our friends ...http://baskeptics.org/node/510
<p>¿Want to put your Drupal<span class="inline inline-right"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/Drupal.thumbnail.png" alt="" title="" class="image image-thumbnail " width="75" height="32" /></span> skills to good use? The Bay Area Skeptics Board wants a zippier web site with sliding banners and such. Leave a 'comment' and we will get back to you.</p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/510#commentsSun, 21 Jan 2018 20:20:12 +0000admin510 at http://baskeptics.orgNeuroscience and the Great Questionshttp://baskeptics.org/node/508
<p>(Any errors in this account<span class="inline inline-right"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/RansomStephens.thumbnail.jpg" alt="Ransom Stephens" title="Ransom Stephens" class="image image-thumbnail " width="118" height="150" /><span class="caption"><strong>Ransom Stephens</strong></span></span> are solely my fault - David Almandsmith)</p>
<p>SkepTalk by Ransom Stephens PhD on 14 January 2018 </p>
<p>This SkepTalk combined science, mirth, and intellectual acumen; a genuine treat. Dr. Stephens brought the audience up to date with fruits of neuroscience research and melded them with an evolutionary perspective.</p>
<p>Dr. Stephens began by pointing out that neuroscience in some sense is self-referential - a case of the brain trying to understand itself.</p>
<p>He then warned against over-simplified ideas such as strict roles for the left brain versus roles for the right brain. There are indeed some differences in roles but...</p>
<p>there is some overlap in duties, especially since the brain evinces considerable plasticity. In the most general case, when you walk into a bar (!) the right brain checks for the unexpected - an acquaintance, a hungry leopard, etc. - without 'you' necessarily aware of the search. Any significant results of the search are passed off to the left brain and into your consciousness. Sort of. Neuroscience is still in its infancy.</p>
<p>And how does something bubble up into your consciousness? Dr. Stephens likes the metaphor of the coffee percolator: activity heats up down in our unconscious until a 'boiling point' when activity percolates up into our conscious. Not a perfect metaphor but somewhat useful at this date.</p>
<p>The normal functioning of the human brain leads to "idea prejudice." Here is how that works:</p>
<ol>
<li>our brain obsessively searches for patterns it might recognize; faces, predators, events</li>
<li>we frequently perceive patterns when the perception is incorrect; i.e. pareidolia or the misinterpretation of random sequences (person appears in your dream and they have a car accident the next day); we categorize fast and think/analyse slowly</li>
<li>our brain suppresses things it fails to categorize whether philosophical, cultural, or even visual (I showed a picture of a blimp to a co-worker and she said she had never seen one. I explained</li>
<p>what blimps were and a month later she 'saw' one in the sky for the first time.)</p>
<li>when the brain encounters previously 'accepted' patterns, those patterns are reinforced; this phenomenon, called confirmation bias, applies to visual patterns (face on the moon) as well as to other patterns such cause and effect (my cold went away after drinking rosehip tea) accepted modes of behavior, and value judgments (the mayor is a crook); information suggesting the mayor is decent is suppressed while criticisms of the mayor reinforces the bias</li>
</ol>
<p>Dr. Stephens shared the discovery that infants have two or three times as many neuronal connections as older children. It may be that infants experience mental chaos and synesthesia that lessens as 'inappropriate' connections are pruned away leaving functionally 'valuable' neural systems.</p>
<p>The question as to which is more important, Nature or Nurture, is so simplistic as to be wrong. Both collaborate to shape the brain. Everything the brain processes originated from the senses.</p>
<p>All 'normal' human brains allow the person to develop exceptional talent. A person who devotes intense practice for two hours a day to some complex skill will, in time, be viewed as exceptionally talented, be it in music, mathematics, juggling, video games, etc.</p>
<p>Dr. Stephens offered theories of "consciousness" and "sentience." He proffered a system where there are levels of sentience. Most of the history of live on our planet consisted of single-celled organisms which amazingly appear to have situational awareness and the ability to respond appropriately to changes around them. Multicellular creatures such as nematodes, anemones, snails, and even plants have somewhat more ability to respond appropriately. Animals with larger brains such as some non-human mammals and dinosaurs (birds) show the additional abilities of abstraction and strategizing. These abilities are rather modest compared to the levels capable of the human brain. It may be that a brain with a hundred billion neurons each with ten thousand axonal connections to other neurons reaches a level where a threshhold effect reaches a critical level that confers a higher level of self-awareness. ¿Or is it still a continuum? The jury is out.</p>
<p>He left us with homework: he suggested we Google Christof Koch. I did that and learned that he is "an American neuroscientist best known for his work on the neural bases of consciousness." Furthermore he "introduced the concept that consciousness is a fundamental property of networked entities." Cool.</p>
<p>Books by Dr. Ransom Stephens:<br />
* The God Patent, 2009, a novel<br />
* Your Pursuit of Greatness, 2011<br />
* The Sensory Deception, 2013, a novel<br />
* The Left Brain Speaks, the Right Brain Laughs, 2016</p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/508#commentsFri, 19 Jan 2018 23:04:29 +0000David Almandsmith508 at http://baskeptics.orgFundraising Campaign for Skeptic Britt Hermeshttp://baskeptics.org/node/506
<p>Britt Hermes is an <span class="inline inline-right"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/Hermes.thumbnail.jpg" alt="Britt Hermes" title="Britt Hermes" class="image image-thumbnail " width="150" height="139" /><span class="caption"><strong>Britt Hermes</strong></span></span>American, a former naturopath, a noted skeptical campaigner, and a PhD student studying in Germany. She has spent much time and effort lately in campaigning against naturopathic practices. She is the author of the blog <a href="https://www.naturopathicdiaries.com/" target="_blank">Naturopathic Diaries</a>.</p>
<p>She has now been taken to court in Germany by U.S.A.-based naturopath ‘Dr’ Colleen Huber, who is claiming that Britt has defamed her. Huber is an outspoken critic of chemotherapy and radiation therapy in cancer treatment. Instead, she uses ‘natural’ therapies that include intravenous infusions of vitamin C and baking soda.</p>
<p>For this reason, <a href="https://www.skeptics.com.au" target="_blank">Australian Skeptics Inc</a> is managing a fundraising campaign to assist Britt in her current legal action.</p>
<p>[Editor: To consider helping Ms. Hermes, please read <a href="https://www.skeptics.com.au/fundraising-campaign-for-britt-hermes/" target="_blank">Fundraising Campaign for Britt Hermes</a>.]</p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/506#commentsWed, 17 Jan 2018 01:01:58 +0000Greg Dorais506 at http://baskeptics.orgSkeptiCal 2018 - Save the datehttp://baskeptics.org/node/504
<p><span class="inline inline-center"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/SkeptiCal2018.png" alt="" title="" class="image image-_original " width="509" height="60" /></span></p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/504#commentsMon, 15 Jan 2018 04:29:59 +0000admin504 at http://baskeptics.orgTop Ten Myths of Homelessnesshttp://baskeptics.org/node/501
<p>A SkepTalk by Carrie Ellen Sager, J.D., Homelessness Program Coordinator, Marin County<br />
14 December 2017<span class="inline inline-right"><img src="http://baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/CarrieSager2017.thumbnail.jpg" alt="Carrie Ellen Sager" title="Carrie Ellen Sager" class="image image-thumbnail " width="124" height="150" /></span></p>
<p>An upbeat talk on homelessness? Well, the problem of homelessness in the Bay Area may border on intractability and underscores the failures of United States' political economics, but Ms. Sager's message, pace, tone, and even her smile made this a lively, enjoyable SkepTalk.</p>
<p>She organized her description of the challenges and successes of Marin County's homeless program by...</p>
<p>using false statements concerning homelessness and then debunking those statements using the results of dozens of peer-reviewed studies and using colorful anecdotes from the frontlines. A number of the false statements were ones that i thought were true before Ms. Sager tore them apart with data from recent research.</p>
<p>An example: "(most of) These people aren't from here, they just come for the services (and the weather)." The facts show differently. In Alameda County, 82% of homeless were living in Alameda County immediately prior to losing a place to dwell. In Marin County, 72%. In San Francisco, 69%. It takes nothing more than getting laid off, getting ill or injured, getting away from an abusive partner, etc. to become one of the local homeless.</p>
<p>Other false statements (paraphrased):<br />
2. Some people just want to be (carefree and) homeless.<br />
3. People are really happy once they get housed.<br />
4. If we start housing the homeless, more will come here.<br />
5. You can't just put a junkie in a house.<br />
6. We can't solve homelessness because there's not enough housing.<br />
7. Let's do what they do in Utah, I heard that's really good.<br />
8. With 'Housing First', people will get sober, get a job, and go on to live independently.<br />
9. Tiny homes sound like a great way to house people.</p>
<p>What about statement number 10? We were promised ten myths! For number 10, Carrie Ellen Sager turned the microphone over to the audience for their questions and ideas. "Number 10" might have gone on until midnight with audience participation but Tucker Hiatt, a Board member of the Bay Area Skeptics, called a halt after allowing a long and lively interchange. As the crowd dispersed, i had the pleasure of chatting with two medical doctors who were attracted to this SkepTalk; and they were glad they came.</p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/501#commentsWed, 20 Dec 2017 06:01:37 +0000David Almandsmith501 at http://baskeptics.orgJust One Drop of Pseudosciencehttp://baskeptics.org/node/496
<p>On Thursday, October 11, 2017, Dr. Eugenie Scott and I scoped out the pro-Homeopathy movie "<a href="https://www.justonedropfilm.com/">Just One Drop</a>" at the <a href="https://www.mvff.com/">Mill Valley Film Festival</a> (MVFF). There was another showing on the following Saturday and one of our goals was to determine whether a public protest was warranted. We’d previously crafted and sent a letter (via both e-mail and snail mail) to the Executive Director of the film festival expressing our concern but did not receive a response.</p>
<!--break--><!--break--><p><span class="inline inline-left"><img src="http://baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/JOD-POSTER-NEW.jpg" alt="Just One Drop: Poster for the pro-homeopathy Film &quot;Just One Drop&quot;" title="Just One Drop: Poster for the pro-homeopathy Film &quot;Just One Drop&quot;" class="image image-preview " width="350" height="500" /><span class="caption" style="width: 348px;"><strong>Just One Drop: </strong>Poster for the pro-homeopathy Film "Just One Drop"</span></span>The movie is what we expected, although better produced (it took 8 years to make). The narrative goes something like this:<br />
<UL><br />
<LI>Nobody knows how homeopathy works. </li><br />
<LI>There are skeptics.</li><br />
<LI>But it works, and we’ll prove this with some anecdotes.</li><br />
<LI>It’s been around for a long time and many people use it around the world.</li><br />
<LI>There’s scientific evidence that it works, but the medical and science establishment won’t acknowledge it and don’t want you to see it.</li><br />
<LI>Summarizing: “It’s magic that works”</li><br />
</ul><br />
A few notable points:<br />
<UL><br />
<LI>The film makers do a reasonably transparent job of explaining homeopathy (often this is obscured as “natural” remedies – not here). They acknowledge that “there’s nothing in it”, but stick to the claim that it works.</li><br />
<LI>Even homeopaths don’t know how it works (they say this repeatedly in the film). It’s also claimed that many homeopaths go to work every day as “skeptics” (but are converted by the end of every day).</li><br />
<LI>The film is packed with anecdotes and questionable historical accounts (like Samuel Hahnemann curing an entire town of cholera). The film starts and ends with an anecdote about an autistic child being “cured” with homeopathy.</li><br />
<LI>There’s an in-depth section of how the Australian government (NHMRC) commissioned a <a href="https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines-publications/cam02> review of studies </a> and how the commission systematically threw out studies submitted by the homeopathy industry that proved efficacy. The movie claims the investigators for the NHMRC cherry picked to deliberately exclude “the best” homeopathy clinical study. They also accuse the NHMRC investigators of having conflict of interests.</li><br />
<LI>Steve Novella and 2 or 3 other credible skeptics represented the position quite well but are edited to very brief (if articulate) comments. Skeptics do not reappear to counter the serous claims, but are presented only as unreasonable curmudgeons who won’t listen to obvious, common-sense facts.</li><br />
<LI>Beyond the obvious logical fallacies of ad populum (an appeal to popularity) and antiquity/tradition (must be good because it is old and been done for a long period of time), the crux of their argument is efficacy – both anecdotal and clinical studies. Although persuasive, skeptics can easily tackle anecdotes with numerous <a href="http://whatstheharm.net/homeopathy.html> counter examples</a> (which are never addressed in the film). Clinical studies that supposedly support homeopathy are referred to in a general way. </li><br />
</ul><br />
Of the approximately 60 attendees of the screening who stayed for the Q&amp;A (most attendees), only 3 hadn’t heard of homeopathy prior to the movie and only 5 (including the 2 of us from Bay Area Skeptics) identified themselves as “skeptics” when asked by the director. Clearly almost everyone in attendance was a dedicated advocate of this practice. The Q&amp;A made it abundantly clear that the crowd was predominantly homeopathy advocates – at which point we knew that there was no point trying to educate the handful of people in the audience who came in to learn. The director explicitly stated that she put her “thumb on the scale” when trying to ensure balance in the film. </p><P><br />
In an odd choice, “Just One Drop” was preceded by the short film “Unspoken” about a young autistic girl (with no mention of homeopathy), begging the question “why didn’t they just give her the homeopathic remedy featured in “Just One Drop”? </p><P><br />
The recommendation to Bay Area Skeptics is not to protest further showings of the film (some future showings may be outside of MVFF). If skeptics would like to attend, we suggest asking questions during Q&amp;A, etc., but anything more is unlikely to sway the dedicated advocates who attend and support this film. Additional publicity may well work against us in promoting it.After attending the film and Q&amp;A, our recommendation is NOT formally to protest for a few reasons:<br />
<OL><br />
<LI>The vast preponderance of attendees were (and likely will be at future screenings) homeopathy enthusiasts -. With most of the crowd being "believers", it's unlikely that we'll be swaying opinions or performing a public service by disseminating information.</li><br />
<LI>The film does a very good job of explaining homeopathy (that it's dilute beyond logic, that there's nothing in it). The film is clear that not even homeopaths understand how it works (but they claim it works). Refuting efficacy is a more detailed and difficult job to people who already believe this is a plausible approach to health.</li><br />
<LI>With limited showings and mostly pro-homeopathy attendees, a protest would likely only bring more attention to this film.</li><br />
<LI>With regards to our local screenings, air quality in Mill Valley at the time of the showings were at an all-time low due to fires in Marin County. It's certainly more dangerous to inhale particulate matter than water without active ingredients, and we love our #SkepticFamily.</li><br />
</ol><br />
We’d encourage other skeptical groups across the country to keep a close watch on the film and contact us if they have questions or additional comments on this film.</p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/496#commentsWed, 18 Oct 2017 02:12:46 +0000Jay Diamond496 at http://baskeptics.orgRevising My Opinion of the Erin Brokavich Case...http://baskeptics.org/node/490
<p>If you're over 30, the name Erin Brokavich likely conjures up images of a working-class hero, fighting for the cancer-ridden little guys against a <span class="inline inline-right"><a href="http://baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/Erin_Brockovich_(film_poster).jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/Erin_Brockovich_(film_poster).thumbnail.jpg" alt="Erin Brokavich (2000)" title="Erin Brokavich (2000)" class="image image-thumbnail " width="101" height="150" /></a><span class="caption"><strong>Erin Brokavich (2000)</strong></span></span>corrupt multi-billion dollar corporation and winning millions for them.</p>
<p>Anyone who saw the <a href="www.imdb.com/title/tt0195685/">eponymous film</a> starring Julia Roberts and Albert Finny was likely wiping away joyful tears by the end, satisfied that the little guys had gotten justice because of this brave woman (who wasn't even a lawyer!). I count myself among the acolytes in those early years after the film's release. Since then, I've gotten new data. As a result, I've changed my mind....</p>
<p>The first person I ever heard question the Brokavich hero narrative was Michael Shermer in his book, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Science-Friction-Where-Known-Meets/dp/0805079149"> Science Friction</a>. In it, Shermer points out that it's highly statistically probable that cancer clusters will occur randomly, with no environmental assistance whatsoever. In other words, there's no reason to expect that cancers will always occur in an even distribution across the landscape, and every reason to expect that they will occasionally clump up, whether there's an environmental influence (e.g., hexavalent chromium leaked into the water table by PG&amp;E) or not.</p>
<p>Even worse, later examinations by people like professor <a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/705826/morgan-hinkley-cancer-cluster-study.pdf ">John Morgan of Loma Linda University revealed</a> that Hinkley, California (where Brokavich staged her battle against PG&amp;E) didn't even have a cancer cluster! He maintains that incidents of cancer diagnoses in that area were no higher than in any other isolated desert community. The California Cancer Registry backed up this assessment, stating that <a href=" www.thedailybeast.com/the-messy-truth-about-erin-brockovich"> cancer rates in Hinkley between 1988 and 2008 were "unremarkable."</a> (Brokavich's lawsuit took place in 1993.)</p>
<p>If you're ready for a truly mind-blowing theory, take a look at the works of science writer George Johnson, author of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Cancer-Chronicles-Unlocking-Medicines-Deepest/dp/B00EP0C3ZQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1503537222&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=the+cancer+chronicles">The Cancer Chronicles</a>, who maintains that <a>the link between environmental contaminants and cancer are "surprisingly weak, if not imaginary."</a></p>
<p>I don't know a lot about the science of cancer, but I do know that people (even those on juries) are prone toward making emotional decisions despite the science. So the record-breaking $333 million settlement that Erin Brokavich and her team won against PG&amp;E may not be based upon the facts at all.</p>
<p>A <a> recent case against Johnson &amp; Johnson </a> may be repeating this sort of science-free decision making by juries. The company has been ordered to pay a woman a $417 million after she convinced a jury that her ovarian cancer was tied directly to her use of their talcum powder. The case is being appealed, but may lead the way to thousands more lawsuits, and like <a> other companies sued without solid science</a>, their eventual bankruptcy.</p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/490#commentsThu, 24 Aug 2017 01:49:15 +0000Sheldon Helms490 at http://baskeptics.orgSkeptiCal 2017http://baskeptics.org/node/488
<p>Special Report by <em>Susan Gerbic</em></p>
<p>(Repinted with permission from &nbsp;<a href="http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/skepti_cal_2017" target="_blank">The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry</a>)</p>
<p>Race, Pornography, Fake News, Eclipse, Brain Myths, Popular Assumptions, and the Magic of Science: those terms sum up the content of the eighth annual SkeptiCal conference held in the Shattuck Hotel in Berkeley, California, on Sunday June 11, 2017. SkeptiCal is a one-day skeptic conference brought to us by the Bay Area Skeptics and the Sacramento Area Skeptics.</p>
<p><span class="inline inline-center"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/SkeptiCalShattuckRoom2017-8pct.jpg" alt="Photo by Susan Gerbic" title="Photo by Susan Gerbic" class="image image-_original " width="368" height="246" /><span class="caption">Photo by Susan Gerbic</span></span></p>
<p>This is the first time being held at the Shattuck, but the event has floated between Berkeley and Oakland, California, over the last eight years,. This time because of the location, the organizers decided to only meet in one room with no breakout sessions running concurrently as it had in the past. I have attended all eight conferences as it is only a two-hour drive from my home in Salinas. Each one has its own flavor, this one seemed...</p>
<p>tighter and the lectures felt like they were given more time, though I think fifty minutes has always been the norm. The space was completely full, with attendance at about 275 and ten exhibitor tables all in the room. It was a cozy feeling; thankfully everyone is friendly.</p>
<p>While each SkeptiCal has its own feel, each skeptic conference in our community also has its own style. Traditionally, SkeptiCal is a no-nonsense, on-time professional kind of event, and this year it was just the same. The format just works; the emcees introduce each lecture with a nice bio; and there is no song and dance (or limericks). On time and usually they can sneak in a Q&amp;A question or two. Audio was handled by Greg Dorais and, other than a brief problem in the first lecture, nothing else occurred to interrupt the flow. As they say, you shouldn’t notice how much work goes on behind the scenes; if you do then something probably went wrong.</p>
<p>I’ve long hoped SkeptiCal would become a two-day conference in order to attract more out-of-town attendees hoping to make this a destination conference. I did meet several people who came from a long way away: two women attending their first skeptic conference came from Oregon, and another woman who has attended a few meetups in the LA area said this was her first real conference. According to the survey results, 40 percent of the attendees were women, and 40 percent were first time SkeptiCal attendees.</p>
<p>Tradition has it that the night before SkeptiCal we hold a SitP event and did so again this year. This small group of about thirty people is when you get to have great one-on-one conversations with acquaintances and make new friends. Social interaction is the key to conferences; people say they come to the conference because of the speakers but return for the people. Otherwise you might as well stay home and watch the videos on YouTube. There is something really heartening about laughing and talking with fellow skeptics, some long-time conference groupies (like myself), and others who just recently learned that there is a skeptic community.</p>
<p>Another aspect of SkeptiCal is how it pulls speakers from local expertise; all lecturers (with the exception of Brian Dunning who came from Southern California) are within the Bay Area. Several of them were unknown to the average skeptic conference attendee, which gives this event a more local feel.</p>
<p>President of the Bay Area Skeptics, Eugenie Scott really needs no introduction to the skeptic community, but I will briefly remind you. She is the former executive director of the National Center for Science Education and a physical anthropologist. Genie was involved in the <em>Kitzmiller vs Dover</em> court case regarding the teaching of intelligent design in public schools in 2005. When other lecturers are on stage and the question of anthropology or Bigfoot comes up, no matter how big the audience, the speaker always good-naturedly says, “If Genie Scott is in the audience, I better be careful with how I say this; I don’t want to get it wrong in front of her.”</p>
<p>For SkeptiCal, Scott’s lecture was called “The Science and Pseudoscience of Race,” which was a very big topic that she had to cut down to fifty minutes.</p>
<p>Sociologist, policy analyst, and certified sex therapist, Marty Klein’s lecture was titled “Pornography 2017: Porn Panic, Public Health, &amp; Porn Literacy.” He talked about the time the world was flooded with free porn, in 2000 broadband Internet was released, and “the world collapsed into another moronic panic about sex… America was not a sexually healthy place.” Klein calls this <em>PornPanic</em>. As a therapist, he states that people would rather pay him “a lot of money to blame pornography than talk about problems with their sex lives." As America is not educating our youth with good sex education, they think that porn is a documentary: “Most sex does not feel like porn looks.” He concludes that communication is the problem not pornography.</p>
<p>Edward Wasserman is a professor of journalism and dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. His lecture “All The News That’s Fit To Fake” was as you can imagine quite timely. He stated that we “pay for information with information, you are being furtively induced to provide or all others to gather (information) about yourself. Content is the lure, content is the bait, you pay for that information.” He talked about the standards of significance; the media is deciding what is news, “Why is it that certain news organizations make such a fuss about it?” He said that stories are framed to have the slant that they want, with news organizations telling reporters to go find an opinion that fits into the story they want to tell. People are led to believe that there is more crime than is happening: “They aren’t going to cover all the people who went to work and didn’t get mugged.” Visuals dominate: “Stories that lend themselves to visuals will tend to get disappropriate coverage.” One of the very dangerous problems with media is the news cycle. The media needs to get a story out very quickly, before social media is flooded with other sources. The example Wasserman offers as an explanation is ofthe Boston Marathon bombing. The media named and released photos of suspects early on, which nearly led to lynch mobs going after innocent people. He ended his lecture with suggestions the media can do to fix the problems, but he felt the changes are unlikely to happen. He ended by saying, “The Internet does not absolve you to check information, in fact it just makes it more acute.”</p>
<p>Andrew Fraknoi is an astronomy professor at Foothill College, and his lecture was titled “Eclipse Myths and How to Prepare for August’s ‘All-American’ Eclipse.” A wealth of knowledge was in this talk on how to safely look at the eclipse, where to be to look at it, and how to handle the logistics of going to where it will best be seen. He talked about how the media was going to steadily increase reporting on the eclipse as we grow closer to the August 21 date, and when doing so, people who live within 100 miles of the path will decide at the last minute to drive to the best viewing sites. The problem with this is that the path of the eclipse across America is mostly rural; infrastructure does not exist for the increased traffic, food, and bathrooms. Good planning as well as safe viewing are the watchwords.</p>
<p><span class="inline inline-right"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/JudithHorstman2017-6pct.jpg" alt="Judith Horstman, photo by Susan Gerbic" title="Judith Horstman, photo by Susan Gerbic" class="image image-_original " width="160" height="240" /><span class="caption">Judith Horstman, photo by Susan Gerbic</span></span>Judith Horstman is a science journalist and author of seven books. Her lecture was titled “Myths of the Brain.” She covered the “we only use 10% of the brain” and “left-brain/right-brain” common myths, but what was new to me was the “you need 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep.” Apparently studies show that we only need four hours of uninterrupted sleep. She said, “When I first started researching… I was surprised at how much misinformation there was about the brain… I should not have been surprised because your brain knows very little about itself.” She gives five best practices for good brain health: exercise, challenge your brain, socialization, nutrition, and rich emotional experiences. Diabetes, high blood pressure, chronic stress, and obesity, she tells us, are very bad for the brain. Horstman suggests that we should all donate our brains to research when we die; they are badly needed for experiments and training.<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<p><span class="inline inline-left"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/BrianDunning2017-12pct.jpg" alt="Brian Dunning, photo by Susan Gerbic" title="Brian Dunning, photo by Susan Gerbic" class="image image-_original " width="175" height="240" /><span class="caption">Brian Dunning, photo by Susan Gerbic</span></span>Brian Dunning is an author and popular science communicator. He is best known for his podcast <em>Skeptoid: Critical Analysis of Pop Phenomena</em>. Dunning has also recently released a free movie aimed at classrooms with free teaching guides, <em>Principals of Curiosity</em>. His lecture at SkeptiCal was called “Waterspouts &amp; Swamp Gas: Challenging Popular Assumptions.” I really enjoyed how he started off his lecture about Timothy McVeigh watching the 1993 Waco siege and how that convinced him of many government conspiracies, eventually masterminding the bombing of the FBI building in Oklahoma City. Dunning really brought it to home that there is real harm in believing in pseudoscience. Dunning talked about people making bad decisions about their health, Jim Henson, Steve Jobs, and Steve McQueen. He also talked about fake bomb detectors being used across the Middle East. Bad decisions and wasted resources all based on false assumptions: lie-detector tests, Myers-Briggs Personality Type, McMartin Preschool and repressed memories, vitamin C, and more.</p>
<p>Luigi Anzivino is an educator at the San Francisco Exploratorium’s Tinkering Studio. He is also a magician who uses his understanding in the brain (he has a PhD in Neuroscience) to educate. His lecture was called “The Science of Magic” and included close-up magic as well as explanations of how to use slight-of-hand to teach critical thinking skills.</p>
<p>Kernan Coleman and Ranch 7 Creative handled the graphics for the conference. Musician Joey Fabian preformed during the lunch break. The Sacramento Area Skeptics are led by Frank Mosher; organizing committee members are Sam Baker, Lauren Camp, Kernan Coleman, Raymond Lee, and Angelo Niosi. The Bay Area Skeptics are led by Eugenie Scott; organizing committee members are David Almandsmith, Işil Arican, Yau-Man Chan, Marilin Colon, Jay Diamond, Greg Dorais, Sheldon Helms, Tucker Hiatt, Herb Masters, and Yuli Talyansky.</p>
<p>All the lectures will be released on the YouTube channel for the Bay Area Skeptics; &nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbB9PH0kOa8bM_GcFFzuMAg" target="_blank">check out their past videos and subscribe</a>.</p>
<p>I came home with six autographed books from the speakers and lots of photos, videos, and some great memories. I was able to reacquaint myself with friends and met new people as well. I know it’s a lot easier to stay home and wait for the lectures on YouTube, but I assure you, the whole experience is so much more rewarding in person.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><span class="inline inline-left"><img src="http://www.baskeptics.org/sites/default/files/images/SusanGerbic_veil.jpg" alt="Susan Gerbic" title="Susan Gerbic" class="image image-_original " width="100" height="100" /></span><br />
&nbsp;<br />
<em>Affectionately called the Wikipediatrician, Susan Gerbic is the cofounder of Monterey County Skeptics and a self-proclaimed skeptical junkie. Susan is also founder of the Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia (GSoW) project. You can contact her at SusanGerbic@yahoo.com.</em></p>
http://baskeptics.org/node/488#commentsSat, 22 Jul 2017 20:54:22 +0000Susan Gerbic488 at http://baskeptics.org